Monthly Archives: February 2014

Recently, the credit card company, Capital One, came under attack for contract language that would allow them to show up a customer’s workplace or home, without warning and at any time. The creditor’s contractual fine print came was the topic of an LA Times article on February 18, that ignited a firestorm of consumer anger. According to the column, the contract states that customers can be contacted by mail, phone, email, or by “personal visit” at home or their place of employment.

A statement released by Capital One insists the language exists mainly to permit recovery of large items like boats, jet skis, and so on, through repossession. Without inclusion of the proper wording they would have little legal ground to stand on should the debtor renege on the agreement, adding that they are reviewing the language following consumer feedback.

You can’t anticipate to win your home back again and fight foreclosure in the event you thoughts and determination aren’t there.My analysis into foreclosures among homeowners demonstrates that numerous people give up to soon. Sure, many folks settle for having the stigma of having a foreclosure on their credit score record with out attempting all possible solutions. If folks would just take the time to discover their options, they would realize that they have a actual opportunity to fight foreclosure and win their home back.You don’t need to permit yourself to become a victim of foreclosure, you do have alternatives.The factors many people give up so immediately and don’t fight foreclosure crops up from the lack of understanding by the property owner and even from numerous counselors who they visit for assistance. Numerous counselors and mortgage officers are so overloaded and uninformed on their own of the truth and what…

Updated 9/15/14: Governor Brown signed AB 2365, put forward by Assemblyman John A. Perez (D-Los Angeles), which makes non-disparagement clauses in contracts for sale or lease of consumer goods or services unlawful unless the clause is knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived by the consumer. Perez authored the bill after learning about the KlearGear case.

The following is a guest blog post by Harmony Groves Kessler,a solo practitioner assisting individuals, small businesses, and attorneys with legal issues in business contracts/transactions public agency law and family law in northern California. She is the former Mayor of Arcata, California, where she served a four-year term on the City Council.

In today’s world, especially with sources like Yelp, it’s simple to find online reviews of most any company. We often rely on posted comments to get a sense of a business and feel justified to warn other customers when we’ve had…

In its first employment-related decision of 2014,[1] the Supreme Court ruled in Sandifer v. United States Steel Corp. that unionized steel workers were not entitled to have the time spent putting on and taking off protective gear factored into their compensated work hours.[2] In doing so, the Court unanimously affirmed the result reached in the 7th Circuit precursor Sandifer, in which Judge Posner wrote for the majority in stating that workers were not entitled to be paid for the time they spent changing clothes and walking to and from the locker room in the plant in which they worked.[3]

While the subject matter of the case seems superficially trivial, it carried important implications to industries that employ workers who are required to wear safety gear.[4] As the Supreme Court remarked, the aggregate of the time and money owed to all employees should…